Dataset Information

A sample selection strategy to boost the statistical power of signature detection in cancer expression profile studies.

ABSTRACT: In case-control profiling studies, increasing the sample size does not always improve statistical power because the variance may also be increased if samples are highly heterogeneous. For instance, tumor samples used for gene expression assay are often heterogeneous in terms of tissue composition or mechanism of progression, or both; however, such variation is rarely taken into account in expression profiles analysis. We use a prostate cancer prognosis study as an example to demonstrate that solely recruiting more patient samples may not increase power for biomarker detection at all. In response to the heterogeneity due to mixed tissue, we developed a sample selection strategy termed Stepwise Enrichment by which samples are systematically culled based on tumor content and analyzed with t-test to determine an optimal threshold for tissue percentage. The selected tissue-percentage threshold identified the most significant data by balancing the sample size and the sample homogeneity; therefore, the power is substantially increased for identifying the prognostic biomarkers in prostate tumor epithelium cells as well as in prostate stroma cells. This strategy can be generally applied to profiling studies where the level of sample heterogeneity can be measured or estimated.

SUBMITTER: Jia Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3786411 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A sample selection strategy to boost the statistical power of signature detection in cancer expression profile studies.

Jia Zhenyu Z Wang Yipeng Y Hu Yuanjie Y McLaren Christine C Yu Yingyan Y Ye Kai K Xia Xiao-Qin XQ Koziol James A JA Lernhardt Waldemar W McClelland Michael M Mercola Dan D

Anti-cancer agents in medicinal chemistry 20130201 2

In case-control profiling studies, increasing the sample size does not always improve statistical power because the variance may also be increased if samples are highly heterogeneous. For instance, tumor samples used for gene expression assay are often heterogeneous in terms of tissue composition or mechanism of progression, or both; however, such variation is rarely taken into account in expression profiles analysis. We use a prostate cancer prognosis study as an example to demonstrate that sol ...[more]

PMID: 22934703

Similar Datasets

Project description:Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) aim to identify genetic variants related to diseases by examining the associations between phenotypes and hundreds of thousands of genotyped markers. Because many genes are potentially involved in common diseases and a large number of markers are analyzed, it is crucial to devise an effective strategy to identify truly associated variants that have individual and/or interactive effects, while controlling false positives at the desired level. Although a number of model selection methods have been proposed in the literature, including marginal search, exhaustive search, and forward search, their relative performance has only been evaluated through limited simulations due to the lack of an analytical approach to calculating the power of these methods. This article develops a novel statistical approach for power calculation, derives accurate formulas for the power of different model selection strategies, and then uses the formulas to evaluate and compare these strategies in genetic model spaces. In contrast to previous studies, our theoretical framework allows for random genotypes, correlations among test statistics, and a false-positive control based on GWAS practice. After the accuracy of our analytical results is validated through simulations, they are utilized to systematically evaluate and compare the performance of these strategies in a wide class of genetic models. For a specific genetic model, our results clearly reveal how different factors, such as effect size, allele frequency, and interaction, jointly affect the statistical power of each strategy. An example is provided for the application of our approach to empirical research. The statistical approach used in our derivations is general and can be employed to address the model selection problems in other random predictor settings. We have developed an R package markerSearchPower to implement our formulas, which can be downloaded from the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN) or http://bioinformatics.med.yale.edu/group/.

Project description:Statistical power is key for robust, replicable science. Here, we systematically explored how numbers of trials and subjects affect statistical power in MEG sensor-level data. More specifically, we simulated "experiments" using the MEG resting-state dataset of the Human Connectome Project (HCP). We divided the data in two conditions, injected a dipolar source at a known anatomical location in the "signal condition", but not in the "noise condition", and detected significant differences at sensor level with classical paired t-tests across subjects, using amplitude, squared amplitude, and global field power (GFP) measures. Group-level detectability of these simulated effects varied drastically with anatomical origin. We thus examined in detail which spatial properties of the sources affected detectability, looking specifically at the distance from closest sensor and orientation of the source, and at the variability of these parameters across subjects. In line with previous single-subject studies, we found that the most detectable effects originate from source locations that are closest to the sensors and oriented tangentially with respect to the head surface. In addition, cross-subject variability in orientation also affected group-level detectability, boosting detection in regions where this variability was small and hindering detection in regions where it was large. Incidentally, we observed a considerable covariation of source position, orientation, and their cross-subject variability in individual brain anatomical space, making it difficult to assess the impact of each of these variables independently of one another. We thus also performed simulations where we controlled spatial properties independently of individual anatomy. These additional simulations confirmed the strong impact of distance and orientation and further showed that orientation variability across subjects affects detectability, whereas position variability does not. Importantly, our study indicates that strict unequivocal recommendations as to the ideal number of trials and subjects for any experiment cannot be realistically provided for neurophysiological studies and should be adapted according to the brain regions under study.

Project description:BackgroundBefore conducting a microarray experiment, one important issue that needs to be determined is the number of arrays required in order to have adequate power to identify differentially expressed genes. This paper discusses some crucial issues in the problem formulation, parameter specifications, and approaches that are commonly proposed for sample size estimation in microarray experiments. Common methods for sample size estimation are formulated as the minimum sample size necessary to achieve a specified sensitivity (proportion of detected truly differentially expressed genes) on average at a specified false discovery rate (FDR) level and specified expected proportion (pi1) of the true differentially expression genes in the array. Unfortunately, the probability of detecting the specified sensitivity in such a formulation can be low. We formulate the sample size problem as the number of arrays needed to achieve a specified sensitivity with 95% probability at the specified significance level. A permutation method using a small pilot dataset to estimate sample size is proposed. This method accounts for correlation and effect size heterogeneity among genes.ResultsA sample size estimate based on the common formulation, to achieve the desired sensitivity on average, can be calculated using a univariate method without taking the correlation among genes into consideration. This formulation of sample size problem is inadequate because the probability of detecting the specified sensitivity can be lower than 50%. On the other hand, the needed sample size calculated by the proposed permutation method will ensure detecting at least the desired sensitivity with 95% probability. The method is shown to perform well for a real example dataset using a small pilot dataset with 4-6 samples per group.ConclusionsWe recommend that the sample size problem should be formulated to detect a specified proportion of differentially expressed genes with 95% probability. This formulation ensures finding the desired proportion of true positives with high probability. The proposed permutation method takes the correlation structure and effect size heterogeneity into consideration and works well using only a small pilot dataset.

Dataset Information

A sample selection strategy to boost the statistical power of signature detection in cancer expression profile studies.

Publications

A sample selection strategy to boost the statistical power of signature detection in cancer expression profile studies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure